Kishan Chand Sharma & Ors v. UOI & Ors

order, after considering the recommendations of both CPC and Anomaly Committee. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we also do not find any hostile discrimination in the treatment meted out to the applicants. We

are inclined to agree with the decision of the respondents and do not find any justifiable reason to interfere in the matter, taking into consideration the rulings given by the Hon"ble Supreme Court in the cases cited above."

¶10We are, thus, constrained to dismiss this writ petition. However, there shall not be any orders as to costs.

(A.K. SIKRI)

JUDGE

July 04, 2008

(J.R. MIDHA) HP.

JUDGE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +WP(C) No.13226/2005 Date of Decision: 04.07.2008 #Kishan Chand Sharma & Others ....Petitioner ! Through: Mr.Sudarshan Rajan Versus $Union of India & Another .....Respondents ^ Through Mr.R.C. Nangia CORAM :- *THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA 1.Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? A.K. SIKRI, J. : 1. The petitioners herein are working as Draftsmen Grade "A" in the Railway Board and were given the replacement scale of Rs.4500-7000 on the implementation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission (in short "5th CPC"). Their counterparts, i.e., Draftsmen Grade II working in the Zonal Railways were, however, placed in the revised scale of Rs.5000-8000. On the plea that they were in the same scale as Draftsmen Grade II before implementation of the 5th CPC and also that their qualification and duty etc. are same, they demanded the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000. Their request was rejected, which compelled them to file OA before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. This OA has also been dismissed vide judgment dated 29.10.2004 and impugning that judgment, present writ petition is filed. The contention of the petitioners is that they have been working as Draftsmen in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2300 since 1994. This post is filled 100% by promotion from the feeder grade draftsman Grade "B". However, in the Zonal Railways, 80% posts in Draftsman Grade-II are filled up by promotion and 20% by Direct recruitment. The minimum qualification for feeder grade in both these posts is the same, i.e., Matriculation and certificate/diploma in Draftsmanship. The pay scale of petitioners and Draftsman Grade II of Zonal Railways till 4th CPC. Howsoever, disparity arose after the implementation of the 5th CPC whereby the Draftsman Grade II of Zonal Railways were given the replacement scale of Rs.5000-8000, whereas the petitioners were given the scale of Rs.4500-7000. 2. Mr.Rajan, learned counsel for the petitioners, was at pain to submit that it was a case of hostile discrimination when the petitioners and the Draftsmen Grade II were treated alike till 31.12.1995 and with effect from 1.1.2006 they were placed in different scales. His submission was that this happened notwithstanding the fact that the clarifications for the post of Draftsmen Grade "A" as well as the Draftsmen Grade II were same. For this purpose, he referred to the Recruitment Rules specifying the clarifications for appointment/promotions to these posts. He also submitted that the petitioner had earlier filed OA No.855/2000 seeking this relief, but the Tribunal had dismissed the said OA. Thereafter, review of that order was also sought by petitioners but the same was not entertained. The petitioners thereupon filed writ petition before this Court which remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to consider the review application filed on the limited question of revision of the pay scale at Rs.5000-8000 instead of Rs.4500-7000. Learned counsel submitted that thereafter the review was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 3.10.2002 directing the Department to constitute an Anomaly Committee. He argued that the Anomaly Committee, while rejecting the plea of the petitioners, ignored the observations of the Tribunal contained in order dated 3.10.2002 wherein the Tribunal had clearly observed as under:- "8. Taking into account the above recommendations of the subsequent replacement scale accorded to the Draftsmen Grade II by the Govt. of India, i.e., Rs.425-700 revised to Rs.1400-2300, we se force in the submissions made by Shri K.B.S. Rajan, Learned Counsel that the expert bodies like the 3rd and 4th Pay Central Pay Commissions have considered the qualifications possessed by these persons for direct recruitment as either the same or similar, i.e., Matric or 10 + 2 + Dipl